Thoughts on the high end....

[Bigerik]

Bigerik, it is about the music. I feel there are musically driven companies. I believe that engineers such as Dennis Had of Cary, David Wilson, Jeff Roland and a host of others like them, do their best to capture the art of music with their products. I also feel there are marques like Infinity and Altec that have been prostituted and stripped of their glory. I guess what I am saying is, audio is a business whose advances are musically driven and whose successes are copied and profit driven.

So very true.
I think another company that has made a music lovers product, rather than an audio lovers product, is Rega. I have seen soooo many posts starting off with;

"I have had my Rega TT for 15 years.... or 22 years... or whatever. "

It seems, the gear that gets the music right is the stuff that stays for around for a long time with minimal changes.

Hmm. What else. The Linn LP12 (yes, I get that there have been a ton of improvements over the years, but a LP12 of 1974 is not indistinguishable from a brand new one). The Technics 1200 even. Various Spendor loudspeakers have had 20 plus year runs. Quad Speakers. I am sure there are many more examples I just can't think of now. Polk's Monitor line lasted for ages.

This stuff just seems to have staying power. *I* think that says a lot.

 

[stuartk]

Well, most cd's are unlistenable anyway, so whats the difference?

I guess you need to make some improvements in your system then. CDs sound just fine here.

 

[Bigerik]

I guess you need to make some improvements in your system then. CDs sound just fine here.

They'd probably sound better if I could keep the stylus from just sliding across the surface.....

 

[RichPA]

Seems to me that your original post raises a number of issues, Erik. First, of course it is easy to get obsessed with gear and its features and specs and lose site of the music - not much difference between receiver power wars in the 70s and obsession with sampling rate now, for example. Second, people seem to get upset by high-priced gear in a way they don't by high-priced cars - I wouldn't buy a Ferrari or a Halcro amp even if I could, but I think it's cool that they exist and I'm happy to read about them. And if someone let me drive a Ferrari or listen to Halcro, that would be cool, too. And, of course, everyone knows about diminishing returns.

But maybe most important, you're right - not every "upgrade" I've made really has been, in terms of listening to music. The main setup I have now makes me happier than I've ever been with a stereo system, but it's not the most expensive. I'm sure I'll change things again someday, but meanwhile,

 

[jn229]

In Bigerik original post he mentioned Monk. This I can listen to, but my 19 year old daughter's choice in music is not mine. Even if it was I could not listen to it because of the way it is mixed. We all own great music on both CD and vinyl, yet rarely listen to it because of the way its recorded. Did the early equipment manufactures get it right or did the early producer/mixers. Is it the chicken or the egg.

So right about the Rega, products like this are bench marks that all others in their price range have to match. They are the classics of the future, er, maybe a twenty something year old Rega is a classic?

 

[M Jarve]

You know, reading through the posts, it seems we may have some music lovers, not just audiophiles, in the audience. It's been my experience (in all honesty here) that the ultra high-end gear (I'm talking the accurate to 0.000001% THD with a frequency response from here to infinity, etc., not just cost) has more in common with 1980's BPC than it does with some just inherently pleasant and musical to listen to.

A perfect, real life example is when I bought a Denon AVR-5800 and JBL LSR32 speaker setup 6 or 7 years ago. This was the end-all, be-all receiver with more power and bandwidth than you could shake a stick at, with the most accurate speakers I could afford at the time. The receiver specced out better than God. And the speakers were accurate to within a cat's whisker to an AU. But throw on some Pink Floyd and in under 30 seconds you were wondering when the CD would end, or if all your grass was cut to the same length.

After upgrading to a lowly harman/kardon 430, there was no turning back. That little h/k playing into a set of beat up Peavey speakers ($<$200 together) beat the pants off of a $4300 receiver playing into $2200 speakers. The Denon and JBL's were sold and I used the money to put a down payment on a house!

That is not to say that all high-end is perfect to the point of revulsion. I've heard $15,000 Legacy's fed by Pass Labs amps that left me not only envious, but a drooling fool.

A rather famous engineer once said (and I might paraphrase) "If it measures good and sounds bad, it is bad. If it measures bad, but sounds good, you've measured the wrong thing." And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the truth regardless of cost, era, lineage, or others' opinions.:thmbsp:

 

[jn229]

Do we get smarter as we get older? It seems every time I've owned a hi-fi that made me want to listen to records from morning until night, I "upgraded" to something that re-ignited my interest in reading.

Just reread this quote from Bigerik. Are we old? Do we listen to music differentlly than our children? Has music and its purpose or art form changed on us? Do we appreciate older gear because we are comfortable with it or because its better? Whew, heavy thoughts time for a vinyl sit down.

 

[JohnVF]

Maybe my age (or lack of it, at 34) colors how I perceive the high end. I didn't grow up drooling over the big silver face recievers, and wasn't around for the transition from tube to SS. So my various systems have no allegience to time. I buy a lot of vintage because I prefer things with history to them, and it's more affordable, and because I'd rather have 20 pairs of great speakers than 1 pair of absolutely jaw dropping amazing speakers. But a great system can have pieces in it from any one of the last 5 or 6 decades and sound fantastic to me. It's great to have so much to choose from.

I did hear a $3500 pair of speakers the other day that made me think, though, that if I bought them I wouldn't have to have a house full of wood boxes to trip over. It was a nice thought for a moment. I got to talk to the designer and after realizing how much time he had spent on them, and seeing as how they were the culmination of his couple of decades designing speakers, and knowing a little bit about how costs of many things only decrease when they are mass produced (which these weren't, yet)..that high price really doesn't seem that high.

 

[doucanoe]

Seems to me that your original post raises a number of issues, Erik. First, of course it is easy to get obsessed with gear and its features and specs and lose site of the music - not much difference between receiver power wars in the 70s and obsession with sampling rate now, for example. Second, people seem to get upset by high-priced gear in a way they don't by high-priced cars - I wouldn't buy a Ferrari or a Halcro amp even if I could, but I think it's cool that they exist and I'm happy to read about them. And if someone let me drive a Ferrari or listen to Halcro, that would be cool, too. And, of course, everyone knows about diminishing returns.

I would buy a Halcro amp, if I could.


RC

 

[Mr. Lin]

Maybe my age (or lack of it, at 34) colors how I perceive the high end. I didn't grow up drooling over the big silver face recievers, and wasn't around for the transition from tube to SS. So my various systems have no allegience to time. I buy a lot of vintage because I prefer things with history to them, and it's more affordable, and because I'd rather have 20 pairs of great speakers than 1 pair of absolutely jaw dropping amazing speakers. But a great system can have pieces in it from any one of the last 5 or 6 decades and sound fantastic to me. It's great to have so much to choose from.

I did hear a $3500 pair of speakers the other day that made me think, though, that if I bought them I wouldn't have to have a house full of wood boxes to trip over. It was a nice thought for a moment. I got to talk to the designer and after realizing how much time he had spent on them, and seeing as how they were the culmination of his couple of decades designing speakers, and knowing a little bit about how costs of many things only decrease when they are mass produced (which these weren't, yet)..that high price really doesn't seem that high.

At age 27 I'm in a very similar situation. I appreciate vintage audio equipment, and I own a Thorens TD125 MKII, but I've chosen to buy a lot of new gear. I love pretty much everything I have, but I definitely understand the theme of this thread and have experienced it myself.

It's kind of difficult to put musicality into words, even though it's apparently (and rightly, IMO) considered the most important aspect of an audio system. To summarize musicality I usually just say that something (a CDP, turntable, whatever) breathes life into the music, while something else sounds analytical, sterile, too cold, etc.

I have learned that the more expensive component is certainly not necessarily the better one, and in fact I'm experiencing that this very moment. Back in February I began listening to headphones much more in the evening, so I decided it would be good to invest in something better than the Grado SR-60 headphones I was using. I purchased the Grado 325i headphones at more than three times the price of the SR-60's. At first I loved them - after all, technically speaking they are better than the SR-60's in the areas of frequency extension, definition, inner detail, and soundstage. Unfortunately they've broken on me, and about four days ago I sent them back to Grado Labs to be repaired. So it's back to the SR-60's, this time with improved headphone pads that I originally bought for the 325i's. Over the last few days I've come to the somewhat startling realization that I enjoy the SR-60's more than the 325i's! They're warmer, there's simply more bass, and the music sounds more personal and alive, if you will.

This is just what came to my mind when I read this thread, the point being that better is not always the best. Of course I'm talking about equipment that's waaay less expensive than the original quote of the thread, but the idea is the same.

Great topic Erik, and timely for me as well.

Dave

 

[JohnVF]

There's also things like, for instance, the fact that I'm using a TT that is from the '80s (Systemdek IIX), but my cartridge (AT 120mlx) is fairly modern. So...is my turntable vintage? Part of it is, but a big part of the sound comes from something more modern.

There are faults in my system to be sure, and if I learned more about the subject I'd probably find serious problems with sound reflections in my room and all of that, but in my happy worlf of bliss at the moment, it gets my toes tapping. Both new and old, high and and vintage can do that. Which is why I love this hobby (and music).

 

[Mr. Lin]

There's also things like, for instance, the fact that I'm using a TT that is from the '80s (Systemdek IIX), but my cartridge (AT 120mlx) is fairly modern. So...is my turntable vintage? Part of it is, but a big part of the sound comes from something more modern.

There are faults in my system to be sure, and if I learned more about the subject I'd probably find serious problems with sound reflections in my room and all of that, but in my happy worlf of bliss at the moment, it gets my toes tapping. Both new and old, high and and vintage can do that. Which is why I love this hobby (and music).

I agree with you. Unfortunately for me, although I truly love my system, I'm far from satisfied. I'll probably never be completely satisfied and finished with it, because perfection is impossible with this hobby IMO, but I do have in mind where I'd like to take it.

 

[stuartk]

They'd probably sound better if I could keep the stylus from just sliding across the surface.....

Ah, you need to adjust your anti-skating then.

 

[Grainger49]

Simply put, to the first post:

AMEN Brother ! ! !

 

[Mister Pig]

Don't Buy the Musicality vs Detail Argument

It's interesting how we use the term musicality. In many cases(not all) it's a nice word to describe subtractions to the music, an artificial warmth, or an uneven tonal balance. Sure it may be pleasant on the ears, thats the positive side, and why these attributes get lumped under this term.

However a system that excels at detail retrevial can be smooth and graceful if the recoding is well done. And a problems in a recording should be noticeable. However this doesn't mean that the music is unlistenable, it is just flawed. What I have experienced is that anytime my system moves towards to a "forgiving" sound I hate it. I want to hear as much of the recoding as possible, and as accurately as my system can get it.

Modern high-end gear is great stuff, and it's pushing of the performance envelope justifies it's price tag in many cases. Not all of them, so the buyer must beware. But there is affordable high-end gear out there too. The Maple Tree gear is reasonably priced, and is truly high end stuff. Transcendent Audio falls into this category too. Speaker technology has advanced a long ways, and I have heard some wonderful Bamberg Audio speakers lately.

Sorry about the original posters turntable experience. Analog is an odd duck. I am 42 and have done vinyl for a long time, although I have left the fold about 4 years ago. When you have so many different components with differing mechanical resonance characteristics, it is darn near impossible to accurately predict what is going to happen. Throw into the mix the different set up tools that a person uses, and this variable creates almost the certainty that results cannot be duplicated. of course there are the traditional limitations of analog that must be accounted for. tracking error of a pivoted tone arm, mechanical isolation issues, limited dynamic range, those are the main ones that come to mind.

Not meaning to place analog in a negative light, but these are real considerations. Digital has their own set. My last turntable was a Teres Audio witha Bubinga and lead shot loaded base, Eminent Technology II linear tracking air bearing arm, and a Dynavector 17D2 cartridge. So it was a pretty decent rig. Sure some days I miss it, but I can achieve long term satisfaction with my digital rig.

The high end is about extracting that final bit of performance. You want he best sound at an affordable price. Not the best sound for a stated dollar amount. It's a small but important distinction.

Regards
Mister Pig

 

[gkimeng]

Oh, the sound changed - sometimes even for the better - but the music always got a lot worse. I remember trading in my Rega Planar 3 for [something] that I was sure to be a big improvement. .......and Stereophile said it was the bomb. After lovingly setting it up, I dropped the needle on a favorite Thelonius Monk record, and knew immediately - I mean within 10 seconds - that I had made a big mistake. Monk sounded as if he had been given a shot of Thorazine, and all the bass, detail and soundstaging that Stereophile had promised couldn't bring the music back to life.[/B]

I realized a long time ago that I don't have "high end" ears or listening tastes, and counted myself the more fortunate for that because I don't have a high end budget, either.

 

[Bigerik]

It's interesting how we use the term musicality. In many cases(not all) it's a nice word to describe subtractions to the music, an artificial warmth, or an uneven tonal balance. Sure it may be pleasant on the ears, thats the positive side, and why these attributes get lumped under this term.

However a system that excels at detail retrevial can be smooth and graceful if the recoding is well done. And a problems in a recording should be noticeable. However this doesn't mean that the music is unlistenable, it is just flawed. What I have experienced is that anytime my system moves towards to a "forgiving" sound I hate it. I want to hear as much of the recoding as possible, and as accurately as my system can get it.

Modern high-end gear is great stuff, and it's pushing of the performance envelope justifies it's price tag in many cases. Not all of them, so the buyer must beware. But there is affordable high-end gear out there too. The Maple Tree gear is reasonably priced, and is truly high end stuff. Transcendent Audio falls into this category too. Speaker technology has advanced a long ways, and I have heard some wonderful Bamberg Audio speakers lately.

Sorry about the original posters turntable experience. Analog is an odd duck. I am 42 and have done vinyl for a long time, although I have left the fold about 4 years ago. When you have so many different components with differing mechanical resonance characteristics, it is darn near impossible to accurately predict what is going to happen. Throw into the mix the different set up tools that a person uses, and this variable creates almost the certainty that results cannot be duplicated. of course there are the traditional limitations of analog that must be accounted for. tracking error of a pivoted tone arm, mechanical isolation issues, limited dynamic range, those are the main ones that come to mind.

Not meaning to place analog in a negative light, but these are real considerations. Digital has their own set. My last turntable was a Teres Audio witha Bubinga and lead shot loaded base, Eminent Technology II linear tracking air bearing arm, and a Dynavector 17D2 cartridge. So it was a pretty decent rig. Sure some days I miss it, but I can achieve long term satisfaction with my digital rig.

The high end is about extracting that final bit of performance. You want he best sound at an affordable price. Not the best sound for a stated dollar amount. It's a small but important distinction.

Regards
Mister Pig

Mister Pig,
Thanks you for your enlightening post. I do mean absolutely no offense to you however, when I say what you describe is exactly the opposite of what I am looking for. To me, it is about the music. The detail and effects you describe don't exist in live music and are, to me, just a distraction from what I value in the recording: The artistry of the songwriter and the performers.

 

[Mister Pig]

No Problem Dude

Mister Pig,
Thanks you for your enlightening post. I do mean absolutely no offense to you however, when I say what you describe is exactly the opposite of what I am looking for. To me, it is about the music. The detail and effects you describe don't exist in live music and are, to me, just a distraction from what I value in the recording: The artistry of the songwriter and the performers.

Not everyone enjoys the same thing. There are many paths to audio nirvana. Certain people are attracted to different system configurations, nothing wrong with that. And peoples tastes change and evolve....okay sometimes the devolve too.

But I would not agree that fine detail doesnt exist in live music. It has too, and a recording can never fully encompass what occurs in a live performance. Actually, I disregard the theory of a stereo completley reproducing a live performance. At best it can accuratly recreate a live recording, or what occurs in the studio. The limitations of mikes,cables, head amps, recorders all ensure that something is lost in the recording process.

But hey, its what we got to work with, and so as a hobbyist we try to get the best sound available to us. And we enjoy the music, which in many cases we would never be exposed to if all we had available is live performances.

So enjoy your system configuration, cause all it has to satisfy is you. I will try to refine mine to where I can extract as much detail out of it and keep the tonal balance even, and the presentation graceful.

Regards
Mister Pig

 

[Rutgers]

Maybe I don't have true Golden Ears, but I'm grateful to live in a time where a NAD C325BEE for $299, Infinity Primus 362 towers for $225/pr, and a $60 Sony SACD changer can bring me to tears while listening to my favorite albums. Things sometimes get even better when I listen to my Dual 1229 that I found used in good shape for $50 or a Technics DVD-A10 that, while obsolete, brings warmth and detail by the truckload. So for well under a thousand dollars, I get chills and captivating music. Something tells me that I would've had to lay out a lot more cash to get a similarly musical system in the 1970s.

The real problem with modern hi-fi as a young practitioner on the budget end are all these ridiculous cable companies and their ridiculous claims. No matter how many times the improvements are shown to be very very subtle (if they're there at all) there are still marginally intelligent audiophiles who INSIST that if you haven't spent as much on cables as you did on the rest of your system, it's all for nought. I know it's bad form to talk cables, but when people come by and say "wow, that's a really great sounding stereo, how much did your speakers cost?" and then they tell me they paid that much for an HDMI cable I get sad. And that's the consumer end of cables, we're not even talking about POWER CORDS and ANJOU SPEAKER CABLES that make music DANCEABLE. It's all so embarrassing to those of us who love music and not sounds.

So give me my budget system which fills my days with beautiful music, and keep all the jargon and gibberish at arm's length.

 

[Bigerik]

A funny twist on this. In Octobers SP Art Dudley starts his review of the Naim CD 555 cd player by telling us that the standard issue cd system in his 2001 Subaru playing some Martin Newel brought him close to tears.
While The same piece through a 6K int. amp 3.5K cdp and 2K speakers bored the pants off of him.
System matching was the gist. There's more to this though.

DO you have a link to this? Been looking for it with no success.